International arbitration allows international business persons from different legal backgrounds to amicably solve their grievances. Parties to a contractual agreement or in an international relationship seek an impartial party who carries out the adjudicatory process. The resolution by the arbitrators is usually binding and carries a provision of arbitration in future contractual disputes. International Arbitration has over the last half century gained popularity because of the expeditious nature of the method. Businesses and international traders prefer international arbitration to the domestic legal process. A dispute would usually be handled under the judicial system under which the dispute occurred. Resolving ...
Court Case Studies Samples For Students
290 samples of this type
If you're looking for a workable method to streamline writing a Case Study about Court, WowEssays.com just might be able to help you out.
For starters, you should skim our huge collection of free samples that cover most diverse Court Case Study topics and showcase the best academic writing practices. Once you feel that you've studied the key principles of content structuring and drawn actionable insights from these expertly written Case Study samples, putting together your own academic work should go much smoother.
However, you might still find yourself in a situation when even using top-notch Court Case Studies doesn't let you get the job accomplished on time. In that case, you can contact our writers and ask them to craft a unique Court paper according to your individual specifications.
Facts of the case: The petitioner in this case, Mr Albert Florence, was arrested on charges of obstruction of justice and use of a deadly weapon. He was eventually sentenced to pay a fine in installments of a certain amount. After he defaulted on these payments, the authorities issued a bench warrant for his arrest. Due to a mistake in the system, however, this warrant was not removed from a statewide computer database. As a result, two years later he was arrested by an officer and brought to the Burlington County Detention Center. After spending six days in detention ...
Jorge Luis Machuca Gonzalez et al. v. Chrysler Corporation et al.
Jorge Luis Machuca Gonzalez et al. v. Chrysler Corporation et al.
Does the cap on tort recovery damages imposed by Mexican law render Mexico an inadequate forum for resolving a tort suit by a Mexican citizen against an American manufacturer and an American airbag designer?
There are four consideration for the court to take into account when determining a case of forum non conveniens. The first factor is whether an alternative forum is available. In making its determination of whether an alternative forum is available, the court will ...
Legal Brief is a written procedural argument of the case in court of law. It outlines court orders during a case in a manner that is easy to understand. Legal Brief is categorized into Appellate Brief and Student Brief according to state laws (Tomkovicz & White, 2012, p.23). Appellate Brief contains records of court proceedings of the case in an Appellate Court while Student Brief is a short analysis of case proceedings that is used for the purpose of learning. In this case, we are going to consider the Student Brief for the purpose of analysis of the case of ...
IRAC: Sei Fujii v State of California
Whether or not, the UN Charter has the effect of invalidating the California Alien Land Law, which prohibited aliens not eligible for citizenship from owning lands.
The signatories to the UN Charter commit themselves to foster world peace by promoting tolerance, respect for treaties and other international laws and universal freedoms, which they will do jointly and on their own to achieve those ends.
The UN Charter does not have the effect of invalidating the Alien Land Law because they are not self-executing. This is evident by the absence of mandatory nature of the language used. Rather, the ...
The Oltz v. St. Peter’s Community Hospital
The Oltz v. St. Peter’s Community Hospital
Anti-trust laws or statutes are of fundamental importance to the health sector, as they influence existing health care entities in several ways. Influence is significant in factors such as how the health care entities grow and expand, especially regarding their relations with medical providers and suppliers and in their own individual or group interaction. Anti-trust statutes, as found under the United States anti-trust law, pertain to a collection of both state and federal government laws that are crucial in regulating the overall organization ...
Gideon v. Wainwright - 372 U.S. 335 (1963)
Gideon v. Wainwright - 372 U.S. 335 (1963)
Clarence Earl Gideon was accused with breaking and entering in order to commit a petty larceny – the crime which is qualified as a felony pursuant to the Florida law. As Gideon appeared in court, he announced that he would not be able to afford legal representation of a counsel thus asking the judge to appoint an attorney at the state`s expense. The judge denied defendant`s motion on the grounds, that under the Florida law the state can appoint a counsel for ...
Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 125 S. Ct. 2796 (2005)
Type of Action
The type of action in this case was in issue.
Facts of the Case
Jessica Gonzales the plaintiff in the case was a woman who had undergone some form of Separation. She and her husband were estranged and she managed to get a restraining order to keep her violent estranged husband away from her. The husband managed to disobey the restraining order and when she went to the police station complaining that her husband was violating the restraining order that had been issued by the court. One time, ...
The issues in the following case are:
Whether the search conducted by the police officers violated a provision of the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution regarding a protection from unreasonable searches and seizures.
Did Mr. Blake had a reasonable expectation of privacy when he was residing at Mr. Smith`s household?
Could the evidence (drugs and guns) be considered admissible in a court of law?
The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides protection against unlawful search and seizure of persons and their property. The provisions of the amendment clearly state that search and seizure shall be conducted with the presence of a warrant that particularly describes the places and/or things ...
In the Supreme Court of US two states, Rhode Island and Massachusetts had disputes over boundaries. The latter claimed ownership for more than two decades, but later, the former challenged the ownership in the Court of Law. In 1962, the State of Massachusetts was supposed to own the territory, which stretched three miles along Charles River in the south. One year later, Rhode Island received a grant bounded by the same river, but to the southern line of Massachusetts boundary. Failure to issue an express order of the crown was because no one expected the boundary to lead to ...
Missouri vs. Seibert
The petitioner was a woman named Seibert. She was charged and convicted of second-degree murder for her alleged involvement in the death of a 17-year-old handicapped boy. Seibert son who had died earlier and to conceal evidence of parental negligence, she colluded with her other son to set her house of fire. She realized that if only her son’s body was found in the charred house, this would also suggest neglectful parenting and so, a decision was made to leave the 17 years old boy in the house too. The police became suspicious of her involvement and picked ...
Brief of Mapp v. Ohio (1961)
Decided June 19, 1961
Character of Action
The case of Dollree Mapp v. State of Ohio (henceforth Mapp v. Ohio) was brought before the Supreme Court of the United States in March of 1961. The case was brought before the Supreme Court after an incident with local law enforcement and a search of Mapp’s home. The defendant was initially convicted in the Cuyahoga County Ohio Court of Common Pleas. The conviction was later affirmed by the Ohio Court of Appeals, and after the affirmation by the Court of Appeals in Ohio, ...
A civil suit brought for violation of Title VII of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) and constructive discharge in violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA).
Facts of the Case:
Andrew Terry, the plaintiff, is a white male who began working for the INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) in New York as a Special Agent in 1976 aged 30. When he was over 40 years old, he was not selected for a vacant position of supervisory criminal investigator. He was not even on the “Best Qualified List” (BQL), even though he had 17 years experience compared with the younger ...
EEOC v. Watkins Motor Line Inc.,
The nexus between human resource management and the law lies in the fact that employers and employees must observe the law. In addition, the law steps in to protect the rights of the employees who invariably are the weaker parties in the employment relationship. In this paper, consideration is placed on the application of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The case essentially turns on the interpretation of the anti-discrimination provisions under the Americans with Disabilities Act. It involves a worker, who previously served as a driver or dockworker. During his employment, he served ...
Free Case Study On Mayfair LTD., Which Makes Decorative Picture Frames, Makes An Agreement With Speedymove
Mayfair Ltd. would be obligated to pay Speedymove the increased price of £8,000 because the modification made to the contract was valid.
A binding contract is created through the process of mutual assent (offer and acceptance) and consideration, definiteness, and when no valid defenses or excuses to contract exist. In this case, both parties appear to agree that a valid contract was formed and existed to deliver 150 frames for an exhibition at the price of 6,000, 25 frames at a time over a period of six weeks, although the fact pattern does not specify whether the ...
U. S. Supreme Court case
The United States Supreme Court was established according to Article III of the Constitution of the United States in 1789. It is the highest federal court in the United States and has the final, decisive decision along with its appellate jurisdiction over all state and federal courts. The Supreme Court of the United States is invoked to observe the U. S. Constitution and the Amendments to it.
A flamboyant example and a landmark about the role of the U. S. Supreme Court (Supreme Court) is Miranda v. Arizona (384 U. S. 436 (1966) case. ...
United States v Williams, 553 U.S. 285 (2008)
A Secret Service agent engaged the defendant in an internet chat room after the latter posted a teasing message that hinted involvement of child pornography. The defendant also attached an uplink that showed children in sexually explicit poses. His house was searched revealing hard drives with images of children in sexually explicit conduct. He was charged with pandering under §2252(A)(a)(3)(B) and child pornography under §2252(A)(a)(5)(B) and convicted by the federal court, but the Court of Appeals reversed the conviction of the first crime ...
Fraud is a common problem in the contemporary legal landscape. Most evident after the fact, it is one of the primary causes of the 2007-2008 financial crisis, sending the country into a recession not seen before since the Great Depression. And yet, there are regulations and regulatory bodies in place that are tasked with eliminating the practice of fraud in the financial sector. In particular, the Securities and Exchange Commission is tasked with the prosecution and enforcement of suits against fraudulent traders. The present case is fertile ground for discussion in this regard, dealing directly with the phenomenon of ...
Business Law Case Study
Was the appellant to compensation from the year 2009 up to 2011?
Oklahoma law provide for compensation but factors such as waiver and laches can defeat compensation claims .In this case, the appellant waived this right by prohibiting the appellant from exercising his parental duties over the child.
In deciding this case, the court addressed two issues. The act of remitting of maintenance by the appellee. The court noted that the appellant paid the maintenance for the child from the year 2002 to the 2009 despite the appellant claiming that there was no child during their marriage ...
Business Law Case Study - Case No. 110,936
Was the appellant entitled to the payment of ``attorney fees and costs” by the appellee after accepting his offer ``judgment”?
American rule offers the guidelines in regard to compensations of ``attorney fees and costs” arising out a case .The rule states that a plaintiff should be compensation for the costs and ```attorney fees” incurred irrespective of accepting an offer`` judgment” from the defendant.
Finnel v Seismic was applied by the appellate court to determine the issue presented by this case. American rule is the basis of reasoning in Oklahoma when dealing with matters dealing with compensation ...
Business Law Case Study - Case No. 112,063
1.Was the appellee entitled to a reimbursement of the maintenance costs he had paid to the children welfare?
2.Did the trial court have the authority to modify an administrative order?
Oklahoma Laws provides that a trial court has the authority to amend an order that it has made if new fats that warrant its amendment are discovered during the hearing of the case.
The appellate court addressed the issue regarding absence of a hearing notice .The court stated that if the appellee had been served, he would have the opportunity to present his argument that he was not ...
A contract is either forceable or unenforceable.For it to be enforceable and valid, it has to meet certain elements: offer, intention to create legal relations, acceptance, and consideration (Beale, 2002). Without any of these elements, the courts will not enforce the contract. However, several reasons ensure that a contract cannot be enforced: duress, misrepresentation, unfair terms and undue influence. In the facts given, each person has their merits, strengths and weaknesses. To analyze the position Steve is in and whether he stands to win any legal action brought against, each case will be analyzed separately, giving the merits ...
The defendant Landri consumed alcoholic drinks in a party organized by his employer Marriott International. The employee drove safely to his residence but was involved in a ``tragic accident” that resulted to the death of Dr. Purton.
The plaintiff’s family sued the company demanding that he is responsible for the harm caused by Landri his employee. The company argued that it was not liable because Landri committed the accident after arriving at his residence and sought for summary judgment. The trial court ruled against Purton’s family and they appealed to the appellate court.
The appellate court ruled ...
The court applies the provisions of the industrial law in reaching the opinions and judgments reached in this set of cases. There are certain important definitions and terminologies used by the court in reaching the opinions hence the courts evaluates them comprehensively to determine the direction of the case in relation to the plaintiff and the defendant. An example of such terms is major changes. In the matter of Kevin Lane, Aleksander Argirov, and James Koehn versus Arrowcrest Group PTY LTD, the court comes to several conclusions based on the facts availed in each instance. The company ...
Good Example Of Case Study On Olsons Grounds Were The Facts That The Votes Were Recounted Unevenly Under Different
A case brief of Bush v. Gore (2000)
The case of George W. Bush, et al v. Albert Gore, Jr., et al (531 U. S. 98, 121 S. Ct. 525), familiar as Bush v. Gore was a disputable one, and was heard on December 11, 2000. The case determined the results of the presidential election in 2000. By court’s order (7-2), the ballot recount that was conducted in certain counties in Florida, was stopped due to the absence of approved standards. The Court declared (in 5 – 2 vote) that there was no sufficient time for establishment of new ...
(Name of Professor)
U.S. Supreme Case of Shelby County v Holder
Shelby County v Holder is a landmark case involving the Supreme Court ruling declaring the provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, particularly sections 5 and 4 (b), as unconstitutional. Section 5 of the said Act requires the local government to get a pre-clearance from the US Attorney General or three judges acting as a panel of the US District Court in Columbia prior to changing the laws on voting to ensure that the new law will not result in the denial of the right to ...
In 2001, American military forces in Afghanistan arrested American Yaser Hamdi. US military officials charged Hamdi with collaborating with the Taliban and subsequently termed as an “enemy combatant,” and detained to a military detention facility in Virginia. Virginia-based lawyer Frank Dunham filed a motion for habeas corpus for Hamdi in Federal court, initially for his own and then on behalf of Hamdi’s father.
In Dunham’s motion to declare Hamdi’s detention unconstitutional, Dunham argued that Hamdi’s “right to due process” as enshrined in the Fifth Amendment by detaining him sine die and not allowing Hamdi ...
Forensic Evidence 1: Kumho Tire Co. V. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (1999)Facts
Patrick Carmichael was driving his minivan on July 6, 1993 when its right rare tire burst was causing the van to turn over. As a result, one passenger died, and several others sustained injuries. Carmichael, enjoined by the survivors and the deceased’s representatives, instituted an action against the tire manufacturer and distributor. They claimed that the accident was caused by a fault in the tire. The claimant’s case by and large relied on the expert opinion of a tire failure analyst. According to the ...
This essay highlights the facts of the case of IBP, Inc v Alvarez in the peer review. It outlines the decision of the initial court and further displays the other decisions in the subsequent courts. It also addresses the principles underlined in the cases outlined. The introduction deals with the facts of the case and the rest of the ideas are discussed in the subsequent sections of the essay.Facts of the case.
The case of IBP, Inc v Alvarez, the employees sued Barber Food and IBP in two separate cases. The suit was brought before the federal district court. ...
In law, there is a provision for a peremptory challenge. Under this provision, attorneys have the discretion to select a jury or reject them even without stating the reasons as to why they do so. Presiding judges have the duty of deciding whether the peremptory challenge is accepted or not. In most cases, such challenges are as a result of a party to a case having a reason to think that engaging some jurors would result in an unfair verdict. When both parties to a case have an agreement as to the composition of the jury, there are high ...
Re: Lola’s Boutique
The following are the findings and answers to the questions you requested tackled in your memo. These findings were made after a scrutiny of the emails, between Lola Styne and Liam Mills:
1. At what point does Lola make an offer to Liam and what importance, if any, is the advertisement placed in the newspaper?
Lola officially made an offer to Liam Mills in her email dated 17 September 2014. Lola’s email meets the definition and requisite elements of an offer. An offer is a definite promise that bounds the offeror to the offeree once the latter ...
Section I. Circle the letter of the most appropriate answer.
1. In Griswold v. Connecticut the Supreme Court found that Connecticut’s statute, which banned contraceptives, violated a freedom expressly protected by which of the first ten amendments of the Constitution of the United States:
a. The First Amendment.
b. The Fifth Amendment.
c. The Fourth Amendment.
d. None of the above.
2. “Substantive due process” refers to those procedures:
a. that are expressly enumerated within the four corners of the United States Constitution.
b. that are not expressly enumerated by the Constitution but held to be essential to ...
Minnesota v. Carter525 U.S. 83 (1998)
This was a case against a man called Carter. It was a case that was argued and also decided in the year 1998 by the supreme court of Minnesota. The case involved a police officer finding out Carter together with John's activities that involved packaging of drugs, to be specific cocaine. The police officer found this out by peeping through a gap on the window of the apartment Carter, and John were at the time. They were arrested by the officer, charged and convicted with offenses involving drugs. However, a particular issue arose ...
Bush, et.al. vs Gore, et.al.
531 U.S. 98
FACTS : In 2008, the lower court in the State of Florida ordered for the manual counting of votes during the recently concluded Presidential election participated by George W. Bush and Al Gore. Bush won but only a few votes over Gore. Because of this, an automatic recounting of votes was set. The Secretary of State issue a deadline as far as the recount was concerned. The Florida Supreme Court extended the deadline from November 14 to November 26. In the counting, the lower court order that a total of 383 ...
On the 28th of February 1973, the Supreme Court released its 5-2 decision declaring the case of United States v. Falstaff Brewing Corporation must be remanded and reversed and supporting the law as constitutional. The verdict rested on the authority of the court over statutory construction. It was determined by the court’s opinion and was liberal in respect. The court conducted a review of the case through appeal and heard the case on the 17th of October 1972. The case started in the US District Court in Rhode Island and was heard straight from that court ...
Federal Trade Commission V. Morton Salt Co. 334 U.S. 37 (1948)
Question One: Abstract
The Federal Trade Commission v. Morton Salt Cocase is a US antitrust landmark case. The respondent, a salt manufacturer, sold one of its brands on a standard discount system under which only few large-scale firms qualified. The Commission then issued a cease and desist order against the respondents herein having found them liable in price discrimination contrary to section 2 of the Clayton Act as amended by the Robinson-Patman Act. The respondent petitioned to the Circuit court of Appeal which quashed the Commission’s decision. Thereafter, the Commission ...
CALIFORNIA CIRCUIT COURT
Civil Action No. 35 of 2014
IN THE MATTER OF; THE CUSTODY OF CHASTITY
SALLY BRIGHT. PETITIONER
JOHN BRIGHT .. RESPONDENT
Comes Sally Bright, by counsel and in her Memorandum she states as follows:
The petitioner was married to the respondent and later separated due to marital difficulties. Later, the petitioner filed a divorce petition and the court granted her temporary custody of their daughter. However, the court granted the respondent weekly visitation a right in regard to their child .The issue is that the respondent wants custody of the child.
A.SHOULD THE PETITIONER BE GRANTED CUSTODY OF THE CHILD?
California family code 320-322 provides that the judge should consider the interests of the child in ...
Katz v. United States (1967)
In 1967, the security agents, FBI arrested Katz and charged him for conducting illicit gambling activities from California to Boston and Miami. The FBI placed a listening and recording gadget on the telephone booth and listened to Katz illegal conversation. In the Southern District Court found Katz guilty and sentenced him. The defendant appealed against the case, but the court of Appeal affirmed the charges. Katz appealed for his case to be ruled by the Supreme Court.
The issue, which Katz seeks a review of the ruling is the government has no right to ...
Kenneth Ravenel v. Fredrick L. Burnett (Case study)
Kenneth Ravenel v. Fredrick L. Burnett (Case study)
Under the field of criminal law, the case, Kenneth RAVENEL v. Fredrick L. BURNETT , September 26, 2008, under the Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama, exemplifies conflict resolution. As an example, it entailed the requisite steps in which conflict may be resolved, in addition to the practicability of their applications. The case in point pertained to the claim by Burnett that Ravenel had threatened him with malicious harm, because of suspecting the former of being in an affair with his wife. With ...
Family law deals with matters related to domestic and family relations. The case of GOBBLE v. STATE of Alabama is one case that attracted lots of attention due to the many family related issues that surrounds the death of Phoenix Parrish who was only four month old. The mystery surrounding the death of the son remains unsolved despite the ruling by the circuit court. Any court with an appellate jurisdiction finds it unnecessary to rewind the decision of the circuit court as it is evident that the defendant unwillingly contributed to the termination of an innocent life of a ...
Monsanto Co. (MC) v. Coramandal Indag Products Ltd. (CIP)
MC had alleged violation of patent by CIP. The patent in question related to the CIP inventions titled Phytotoxic Compositions and Grass Selective Herbicide Compositions contained the active ingredient named Butachlor which was duly patented by the plaintiff appellant.
The case was before the judicial system of India. It had first been heard in the trail Court and a ruling reached in favor of the defendants as the lower court held that the said patents were not existent and that the defendant respondent had not violated any patent thereof. The ...
COURT OF APPEAL OF CALIFORNIA, FOURTH DISTRICT, DIVISION THREE.
COLT V. FREEDOM COMMUNICATIONS
109 CAL.APP.4TH 1551 (CAL. APP. 2003)
Facts: According to the case, the mentioned facts were the ones roaming around the illegal deal that has taken place on the internet using the website named as Fast-Trades.com. Colt has used free subscription by using this website in 1999 and the period was 2 months long to manipulate the price of 4 stocks. Also, the Colt has raised up the stock prices up to 700% that was short term prices. Further, stats show that Colt has gained a profitable amount of up to $345000 for himself only. Therefore, ...
This paper was prepared for Course ________________ for Professor _______________.
BURDITT v US DEPT. OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES 2
Burditt v US Dept. of Health and Human Services
This case was decided on July 9, 1991 by the United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. According to 42 U.S.C. § 1395cc, all hospitals must treat all human beings who enter their emergency departments in accordance with the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA), 42 U.S.C. § 1395dd. In this case, Mrs. Rose Rivera arrived in the DeTar Hospital in Victoria, Texas at 4:00 pm on December 5, 1986, with her contractions roughly one minute apart for her sixth ...
19th May, 214
Ans1. The West Virginia’s Supreme Court of Appeals ruled that the plaintiff had stated a claim for the negligent infliction of emotional distress. AIDS is a serious disease and is like a slow death to the person and is emotional trauma even for the family. Court’s findings are appreciable as the physician who has committed this gross act of negligence should have been penalized and plaintiff who suffered emotional distress can ask for compensation in the form of cash or kind. In the worst case, physician’s license can be cancelled, prohibiting him to ...
The United States Supreme Court, in the course of its interpreting the tenets of the Constitution, has commonly regarded the 12 man jury panel as critical to the satisfaction of the right to a jury trial by an accused in court, as ruled in Thompson v Utah (1898). However, the High Court has backtracked from this position in recent times, with Justice Byron White enumerating the reasons in the decision of the Court in Williams v Florida (1970). In the decision in Williams, the Court gave several reasons as their justification from retracting from the decision in Thompson.
The courts judicial review and constitutional interpretation has been a central rational objection for democracy. The regular judicial invalidation of policies passed by elected officials as a minimum brought up problems of democratic legitimacy. The rational objection, which has been brought up against a background over many years of the United States populist political argument, prompted the active use of the judicial power in constitutional interpretation give way to the decision of legislative and majorities. The courts power in striking down laws considered unconstitutional has been politically controversial throughout American history (Prakash, 2003). The judicial review power has become ...
National Engineering & Contracting Co v. OSHA Review Comm. 45 F 3d 476 (D.C.1995)
National Engineering & Contracting Co v. OSHA Review Comm. 45 F 3d 476 (D.C.1995)
National Engineering & Contracting Company is the petitioner and the Occupational Safety And Health Act (OSHA) Review Commission is the respondent represented by the Secretary of Labor, United States Department of Labor in the United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit. Case no 93-1468 Argued Oct. 18, 1994.—February 03, 1995 before Circuit Judges Buckley, Williams and Henderson.
Petition for review of $ 400 imposed on National Engineering and Contracting Company (National) by ...
The legal issue of ABC partners entailed negligence having set a company beyond their jurisdiction and failed to register a company. ABC is liable to pay damages to Robert Knight. This case is tortuous liability due to the wrongful act of abandoning an oil well and failing to secure a place. This results in Robert having an injury due to the negligent act. The legal rule of Tort holds that one who suffers in case of negligence of another party can claim damages. In this case, ABC partners owe a duty of care to Robert Knight who suffers injury ...
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
190 F. Supp. 116 (1960) U.S. Dist.
Frigaliment Importing Co. (Plaintiff)
B.N.S. International Sales Corp. (Defendant)
The Defendant, B.N.S. International Sales Corp. entered into two agreements to sell chicken to Frigaliment Importing Co., the Plaintiff. When the first shipment reached Switzerland, the Plaintiff realized that the shipment did not contain young chickens for broiling and frying, but contained heavier birds for stewing. The Defendant Company was of the view that any chicken would be able to meet the specifications of the contract as regards the quantity and weight. Conversely, the Plaintiff Company believed that the ...
Type of Action
The case is a review by the United States Court of Appeals on an inferior court’s ruling providing for the apparent denial of partial summary judgment and the dismissal on summary judgment requested by the appellant.
Facts of the case
Daniels, a police officer in Arlington used to work in the plain clothes department. Daniels used to wear a gold cross pin as a symbol of his evangelical Christianity. He was transferred to a uniformed division that did not require him to wear a gold cross pin. Arlington Police Department General Order 205 required any officer seeking to wear a pin to ...
Japan, in the implementation of the Japanese Liquor Taxes Law, sought to impose higher taxes on the foreign manufactured spirits and alcoholic products as opposed to the lower taxes on the locally produced shochu. The complainants who included the European Union, Canada and the United States of America sought an interpretation of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and in particular four provisions on the issues of taxation of products.
The case was first heard by the Disputes Settlement Body of the World Trade Organization and appealed against at the Appellate Body of the same institution.
Since early 1990s, there have been issues relating to water problems, conflicts, and compromises over water. Projects have been established to make appropriate documents relating the issues, problems and solutions to the west conflicts and settlements over water. This research currently will offer on various ways the government handling the problem of water rights of Native Americans tribes in Arizona. These tribes include the Hopi, Navajo, and the Pima tribes in Arizona. The group participates on Federal Negotiation team as activities intensify and more progress made for these teams. Thus, it is the drive of this project to digitize ...
On the evening of May 18 1985, the defendant and his friend Peter Maskorich were drinking. They left the bar at around midnight. In the early morning hours, the defendant and Maskorich wound up racing the defendant’s boat in Sacramento River. There were no floatation devices in the boat. At 3am, Gary Bingham heard noise and he went outside and saw a boat with two people inside at the bend in the river. Rodney and Susan Logan who were fishing also saw an aluminium boat with two men in it. The boat had no running lights and it ...
People v. Poplar 20 Mich. App. 132, 173 N.W.2d 732 (1970) was an appeal filed in the Michigan Appellate Court by Marathon Poplar seeking to set aside a conviction of lower court that had found him guilty of aiding and abetting the crime of breaking and entering and of assault with intent to commit murder. The facts of the case which gave rise to the appeal are as follows.
On December 3, 1964 in the early morning hours, two men, Clifford Lorrick and Alfred Williams broke into the Oak recreation park building. However, before they could steal anything from ...
The deceased, Carol Hoffman was murdered by her husband on the or about the evening of 10th or the early morning of 11th August 1981. They had earlier on spent the day together with their children and everything seemed fine. However, when they went to bed at night, David wanted to make love to his wife and when she refused, he choked her to death. After his wife’s death, David went to the basement of the house to call his mother (appellant) and asked her to go and sit in the living room. Sitting in the living room ...
ELK GROVE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT V. NEWDOW, NO. 02-1624
Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, No. 02-1624
On 24th march, 2004 the case between Elk Grove Unified School District and Newdow was heard in the U.S supreme court. The court was to determine and rule on two essential issues concerning the case. The Supreme Court was therefore to determine whether Newdow who was the plaintiff and a noncustodial parent had standing in challenging recitation of the pledge by Elk Grove Unified School District. If the court ruled in favor of the plaintiff then, it was also to determine ...
In the Canadian criminal justice system, bail suffices for purposes of releasing the accused while still on trial. The accused is afforded an opportunity out of detention at least until he is proven guilty, proof which has to be beyond reasonable doubts. It is in appreciation of the role of bail and the courts that confer the same thereof that I visited the said courts. On November 20th 2013 I visited a bail court as part of my class assignment to examine cases of accused being processed through a bail hearing. The bail court I visited was City Hall ...
Legal Environment of Admin
Minimum Procedure: Matthews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976)
Issue - Does receiving a notice and opportunity to comment in writing a valid ground to cut a person’s legal benefits without going through a full evidentiary hearing? This is the central issue pertaining to the interpretation of due process in the Fifth Amendment.
Decision - The Supreme Court ruled the due process in the Fifth Amendment does not require evidentiary hearing given that the right to receive notice and opportunity to comment in writing was provided to the plaintiff.
Reasoning - The court argues that the determination of ...
A recent United States Court of International Trade case is Marvin Furniture (Shanghai) Co. v. United States. In the case, the plaintiff was the Marvin Furniture, while the defendant was the United States. The case involved efforts by the plaintiff to withdraw the decision made during the Marvin Furniture (Shanghai) Co. v. United States, 36 CIT, 867 F. Supp. 2d 1302, whereby the court found Marvin to be responsible importer of goods that had entered US but were not reported, hence resulting to rescission. The bases of defendant was that the plaintiff had failed to disclose it first exports ...
Using someone’s credit card without card owner’s permission is an offense. If it used accidentally and after realizing the same, card owner is compensated accordingly then the act may not be punishable but in case where the card is used several times without permission of credit card owner, the said act amounts to theft. The amount used, and frequency of using such stolen cards is taken into account by courts while deciding the guilt and punishment in such cases. Facts and circumstances of every case are observed in totality and then it is decided that any act ...